At 1/27/2016 9:27:03 AM, Axonly wrote:I used to come here a year ago, and have now rejoining, it is quite interesting (and amusing) to see that petty religious wars are still raging, its quite impressive.

10,000 years and counting............

"Seems like another attempt to insert God into areas our knowledge has yet to penetrate. You figure God would be bigger than the gaps of our ignorance." Drafterman 19/5/12

At 1/27/2016 9:27:03 AM, Axonly wrote:I used to come here a year ago, and have now rejoining, it is quite interesting (and amusing) to see that petty religious wars are still raging, its quite impressive.

I play for team atheist. It sure is hard out here on the fields. The way the Christians beat around the bush . Just to say . I believe in the man in the sky, with powers . They side track us . Lead us astray if you will. Next thing where talking about Paul 4:7 . I've learned more of the bible in 3 months here . Then I . Well 30 + years. It's a good game , good game.

At 1/27/2016 9:27:03 AM, Axonly wrote:I used to come here a year ago, and have now rejoining, it is quite interesting (and amusing) to see that petty religious wars are still raging, its quite impressive.

I play for team atheist. It sure is hard out here on the fields. The way the Christians beat around the bush . Just to say . I believe in the man in the sky, with powers . They side track us . Lead us astray if you will. Next thing where talking about Paul 4:7 . I've learned more of the bible in 3 months here . Then I . Well 30 + years. It's a good game , good game.

I am really tired of atheists misconstruing God as man in the sky. It's invisible man outside our universe. Get it right.

"Seems like another attempt to insert God into areas our knowledge has yet to penetrate. You figure God would be bigger than the gaps of our ignorance." Drafterman 19/5/12

I used to come here a year ago, and have now rejoining, it is quite interesting (and amusing) to see that petty religious wars are still raging, its quite impressive.

So people come here purposely for intellectual stimulation in the form of debate, which you call "petty religious wars" and are amused at your turn of phrase?

I take it you did not come here at first, or now, for debate......sorry, petty religious wars. So what brought you here the first time? And why have you returned? Were you looking for profound religious wars? petty religious friendly competitions?

I used to come here a year ago, and have now rejoining, it is quite interesting (and amusing) to see that petty religious wars are still raging, its quite impressive.

So people come here purposely for intellectual stimulation in the form of debate, which you call "petty religious wars" and are amused at your turn of phrase?

I take it you did not come here at first, or now, for debate......sorry, petty religious wars. So what brought you here the first time? And why have you returned? Were you looking for profound religious wars? petty religious friendly competitions?

If you're going to be smug, it really helps to be bright.

Intellectual. You wrecked any intellectual talking. By being a Christian. Your the 1 with powerful god that you believe in . I mean powerful god that you worship. You worship something that can NEVER EVER be proven. And you want intellectual talk. Wrong forum my friend . Your after the arts forum, that's down the hall .

I used to come here a year ago, and have now rejoining, it is quite interesting (and amusing) to see that petty religious wars are still raging, its quite impressive.

So people come here purposely for intellectual stimulation in the form of debate, which you call "petty religious wars" and are amused at your turn of phrase?

I take it you did not come here at first, or now, for debate......sorry, petty religious wars. So what brought you here the first time? And why have you returned? Were you looking for profound religious wars? petty religious friendly competitions?

If you're going to be smug, it really helps to be bright.

Intellectual. You wrecked any intellectual talking. By being a Christian. Your the 1 with powerful god that you believe in . I mean powerful god that you worship. You worship something that can NEVER EVER be proven. And you want intellectual talk. Wrong forum my friend . Your after the arts forum, that's down the hall .

The thing that is funny about these kinds of posts is how they haven't a clue about the difference between their thoughts and reality. They think Christians are stupid. Do they offer any evidence? Any argumentation? No. Not only do they irrationally assume it, (on a debate site no less!) but behave as if everyone else has!

And if you post any logic showing that they are being illogical, they get into a huff that you aren't automatically accepting their belief, and that their belief is so obviously correct, it needs no support.Example of the condition - http://www.debate.org...

lol. Deb-8-A-Bull, I've seen your posts, and believe me, I'm shaking in my booties. Yeah, you're who we turn to for advice on intellectualism.

I used to come here a year ago, and have now rejoining, it is quite interesting (and amusing) to see that petty religious wars are still raging, its quite impressive.

So people come here purposely for intellectual stimulation in the form of debate, which you call "petty religious wars" and are amused at your turn of phrase?

I take it you did not come here at first, or now, for debate......sorry, petty religious wars. So what brought you here the first time? And why have you returned? Were you looking for profound religious wars? petty religious friendly competitions?

If you're going to be smug, it really helps to be bright.

Intellectual. You wrecked any intellectual talking. By being a Christian. Your the 1 with powerful god that you believe in . I mean powerful god that you worship. You worship something that can NEVER EVER be proven. And you want intellectual talk. Wrong forum my friend . Your after the arts forum, that's down the hall .

The thing that is funny about these kinds of posts is how they haven't a clue about the difference between their thoughts and reality. They think Christians are stupid. Do they offer any evidence? Any argumentation? No. Not only do they irrationally assume it, (on a debate site no less!) but behave as if everyone else has!

And if you post any logic showing that they are being illogical, they get into a huff that you aren't automatically accepting their belief, and that their belief is so obviously correct, it needs no support.

Typically "non existence" isn't something that needs to be "proven". And, again, typically, the working presupposition is that something in mind doesn't exist until such time as evidence avails it.

So... there is that.

However, if you feel as though something should be assumed to exist with no evidence to its existence (and you will notice I say evidence to existence, not traits you can assign to shoe horn it into plausibility), blaze away.

Here we have an advocate for Islamic arranged marriages demonstrating that children can consent to sex.http://www.debate.org...

I used to come here a year ago, and have now rejoining, it is quite interesting (and amusing) to see that petty religious wars are still raging, its quite impressive.

So people come here purposely for intellectual stimulation in the form of debate, which you call "petty religious wars" and are amused at your turn of phrase?

I take it you did not come here at first, or now, for debate......sorry, petty religious wars. So what brought you here the first time? And why have you returned? Were you looking for profound religious wars? petty religious friendly competitions?

If you're going to be smug, it really helps to be bright.

Intellectual. You wrecked any intellectual talking. By being a Christian. Your the 1 with powerful god that you believe in . I mean powerful god that you worship. You worship something that can NEVER EVER be proven. And you want intellectual talk. Wrong forum my friend . Your after the arts forum, that's down the hall .

The thing that is funny about these kinds of posts is how they haven't a clue about the difference between their thoughts and reality. They think Christians are stupid. Do they offer any evidence? Any argumentation? No. Not only do they irrationally assume it, (on a debate site no less!) but behave as if everyone else has!

And if you post any logic showing that they are being illogical, they get into a huff that you aren't automatically accepting their belief, and that their belief is so obviously correct, it needs no support.

Typically "non existence" isn't something that needs to be "proven".

No one has asked the atheist to prove that God doesn't exist. At least not here in this thread. Is this a red herring? So early?

And, again, typically, the working presupposition is that something in mind doesn't exist until such time as evidence avails it.

And you say there is no evidence, and I say there is. Your position doesn't automatically trump. The theist isn't asking for your validation. His position doesn't become true only after you agree with it, and it does not fall apart simply because you dismiss his evidence.

So... there is that.

Yes. the atheist will be required to argue his position instead of pretending it has been established. That will make it harder for him but fairer for all. N'est-ce pas?

However, if you feel as though something should be assumed to exist with no evidence to its existence (and you will notice I say evidence to existence, not traits you can assign to shoe horn it into plausibility), blaze away.

You need to start a new thread if you want to start a new convo.

If you feel as though something should be assumed not to exist because no evidence to its existence has been found (and you will notice you are not sitting in judgement of the evidence), blaze away.

For this thread, answer the questions I asked the OP, or wait for him to respond himself. The fact is that his post is contradictory. So I have asked him questions.

As to your post, again I have to tell you, we will debate on a level playing field. The atheist will not dictate the terms of debate. Why should we accept your claim that there is no evidence for God? Who died and made you king? I believe there is evidence for God. So we begin equally and and each of us must argue his point.

But you atheists want us to begin with you in the judge chair, we have to nullify your claim which you pretend is established and must be disproved. Use that tactic on the newbies. The point of a debate site is that both people enter into the debate with neither position being true, and one person or the other must use logic and reason to show his position as more reasonable/logical. Why is that so hard for atheists to see?

I used to come here a year ago, and have now rejoining, it is quite interesting (and amusing) to see that petty religious wars are still raging, its quite impressive.

So people come here purposely for intellectual stimulation in the form of debate, which you call "petty religious wars" and are amused at your turn of phrase?

I take it you did not come here at first, or now, for debate......sorry, petty religious wars. So what brought you here the first time? And why have you returned? Were you looking for profound religious wars? petty religious friendly competitions?

If you're going to be smug, it really helps to be bright.

Intellectual. You wrecked any intellectual talking. By being a Christian. Your the 1 with powerful god that you believe in . I mean powerful god that you worship. You worship something that can NEVER EVER be proven. And you want intellectual talk. Wrong forum my friend . Your after the arts forum, that's down the hall .

The thing that is funny about these kinds of posts is how they haven't a clue about the difference between their thoughts and reality. They think Christians are stupid. Do they offer any evidence? Any argumentation? No. Not only do they irrationally assume it, (on a debate site no less!) but behave as if everyone else has!

And if you post any logic showing that they are being illogical, they get into a huff that you aren't automatically accepting their belief, and that their belief is so obviously correct, it needs no support.

Typically "non existence" isn't something that needs to be "proven".

No one has asked the atheist to prove that God doesn't exist.

-because non-existence doesn't need to be "proven"-.

And, again, typically, the working presupposition is that something in mind doesn't exist until such time as evidence avails it.

And you say there is no evidence, and I say there is.

And in doing so, you point to the world, then give the entity in mind the ability to create such a thing, and because it has such ability, it simply must have.

"evidence". Yay.

Your position doesn't automatically trump. The theist isn't asking for your validation. His position doesn't become true only after you agree with it, and it does not fall apart simply because you dismiss his evidence.

So... there is that.

Yes. the atheist will be required to argue his position instead of pretending it has been established. That will make it harder for him but fairer for all. N'est-ce pas?

How exactly do you argue "doesn't exist"? What evidence do you present to that conclusion? How exactly do you contend that against literally a concept that can have traits and abilities added and subtracted from it on a whim, and philosophically justified, but never empirically shown?

However, if you feel as though something should be assumed to exist with no evidence to its existence (and you will notice I say evidence to existence, not traits you can assign to shoe horn it into plausibility), blaze away.

You need to start a new thread if you want to start a new convo.

If you feel as though something should be assumed not to exist because no evidence to its existence has been found (and you will notice you are not sitting in judgement of the evidence), blaze away.

.... gee, that sounds almost rational. No evidence to existence, assume it not to exist. Thanks, Ethan.

For this thread, answer the questions I asked the OP, or wait for him to respond himself. The fact is that his post is contradictory. So I have asked him questions.

As to your post, again I have to tell you, we will debate on a level playing field. The atheist will not dictate the terms of debate.

I take it that is reserved for the "theist"?

Why should we accept your claim that there is no evidence for God? Who died and made you king? I believe there is evidence for God. So we begin equally and and each of us must argue his point.

That hinges upon you defining your God, which... well, is an ad hoc or as needed attribution. I simply state: matter and energy is neither created nor destroyed. Should that hold true (and there really isn't a reason not to think it wouldn't), God is not needed. I take the 'eternal' aspect of God, and assign it to something we empirically know, or at least have justifiable reason to assume is true.

But you atheists want us to begin with you in the judge chair, we have to nullify your claim which you pretend is established and must be disproved. The point of a debate site is that both people enter into the debate with neither position being true, and one person or the other must use logic and reason to show his position as more reasonable/logical. Why is that so hard for atheists to see?

Because inventing traits, motives, and abilities for an entity to fit a natural world seems absurd at face value.

God is good. But evil exists. Well, God therefore MUST prefer free will. Where did God come from? God is eternal, but matter and energy MUST have a source. God has a plan, and loves you, and doesn't have a specific plan, and you have free will, but He knows all, and can be merciful, and just, but is consistent, and He is never evil, but is vain, and punishes through generations, but is still some how just...

God's arguments for existence are philosophical. Atheists don't get the luxury of being able to add or subtract traits from a material world in hopes of defining something into existence. That continually has been religion's MO: Resculpt the supernatural to seem more plausible. From pantheism to pseudo-pantheism (Trinity), to monotheism (sort of), to Monotheism with 'touched' emissaries to earth to straight up worship of aliens, its a continual shifting paradigm to stay relevant in a world in which the supernatural seems less super and more natural.

Here we have an advocate for Islamic arranged marriages demonstrating that children can consent to sex.http://www.debate.org...

At 1/27/2016 9:27:03 AM, Axonly wrote:I used to come here a year ago, and have now rejoining, it is quite interesting (and amusing) to see that petty religious wars are still raging, its quite impressive.

On the subject of evidence it"s not that there is no evidence pro or con on the existence of God. The universe or existence and all that"s in it, is evidence. But evidence that proves who"s theory, or who's view, or that the claimer really knows. God"s exist because men worship god"s, you can't stop that, nations have tried, but which god is, or is there a true and Living God (as in Creator and Judge of all things) is the argument, and the universe and what is manifested therein, is the evidence used to support yea or na.

At 1/27/2016 4:12:12 PM, DPMartin wrote:On the subject of evidence it"s not that there is no evidence pro or con on the existence of God. The universe or existence and all that"s in it, is evidence. But evidence that proves who"s theory, or who's view, or that the claimer really knows.

Science shows that the universe exists in it's current form because of the laws of physics through observation. In other words, the conclusion follows the premise. With your conclusion of God, how does that follow the premise of an existing universe? How do you arrive at such a conclusion?

God"s exist because men worship god"s, you can't stop that, nations have tried, but which god is, or is there a true and Living God (as in Creator and Judge of all things) is the argument, and the universe and what is manifested therein, is the evidence used to support yea or na.

What evidence supports your God?

So to say there is no evedance for the existance of God is incorrect.

Then, show us the evidence or retract your statement.

Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
There would be peace if you obeyed us.~Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth